Very much agree with all this, especially the bits I've put in bold, and most important of all the practice.

Even if you can't get to Humberside, get to an airfield somewhere and hang out near the aeroplanes, if you haven't already spent time doing this.

I'd say 1/250 is at the short end of the exposure range unless it's taking off and you might get away with a little shorter.

I wasn't aware of the Canadian Lanc coming over, but if I have some time, I'll be looking to get some shots of them both in the air. That is the holy grail, really. Quite likely a literally once-in-a-lifetime thing, to have both of them.

The K-5 AF should be Ok for the Lancaster; it doesn't go very fast...

If it's manoevring around, 500mm might be useful, as it was with a couple of these...

[IMG]http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t244/chris5gd/Aviation/Farnborough%202012%20July%2015/IMGP2693.jpg[/IMG]

See what I mean about 1/250 really being a bit on the short side - the above is 1/200.

As is this, not that you can tell with the props edge on...
[IMG]http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t244/chris5gd/Aviation/Farnborough%202012%20July%2015/IMGP2691.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t244/chris5gd/Aviation/Farnborough%202012%20July%2015/IMGP2682.jpg[/IMG]

But if you're close, even 75mm is ample...

[IMG]http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t244/chris5gd/Aviation/Farnborough%202012%20July%2015/IMGP2603.jpg[/IMG]

Does the 18-270 barrel at the short end the way the 18-250 does?

I wish he had interest-free credit, like Jessops.

I'd have had a K-3 at its initial release price, probably...

Not that I'd buy one from Jessops just to get the IFC.

Definitely not.

It's just that by not already carrying out a lossy compression during the generation of the JPEG, there's potentially more information to recover from the shadows if you start with the RAW file.

This is an example of why I think the whole cliché debate is completely sterile.

That scene won't look like that tomorrow, and it's a very peaceful, relaxing image that totally deserves to be.

If I had one teensy comment it would be that I think there's slightly too much foreground grass, which unbalances the whole slightly.

Other than that I like it very much.

I usually hate borders, but yours is unfussy, and the caption is pastel enough not to dominate and distract. So +1 there too

I very much like the colour one, though I agree that the extra space at the top improves it.

The shades of pink and green change so subtly that the colour adds a great deal - the mono is a pale shadow in comparison, to my eye.

It's a bit noisy.

Arctic Butterfly for stuff that isn't stuck, wet clean if it's stuck.

I've still got the fluid and swabs I bought from the site the OP cites.

The K-5 is better than the K10D for sensor dust, but now after more than two years, I've finally got a couple of spots that won't shift, so I'll be getting them out again.

I have a vague memory that not all fluids are Ok for all sensors, so it's worth checking.

^^^ What they all said.

And a particular thumbs up for leaving the EXIF in the images too; so many people don't, and it makes such a difference to be able to see how the image was shot.

I thought the D7100 was weather sealed?